Relationship between Perceived Organizational Politics and Its Negative Outcomes: Moderating Role of Perceived Organizational Support

The present study focused on measuring the moderating effect of perceived organizational support on the relationship between perceived organizational politics, affective commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior. It was assumed that higher perception of organizational support would dampen the relationship of perceived organizational politics with affective commitment of the employees with their organization and their organizational citizenship behavior. Perceived organizational politics was measured using Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (Kacmar & Carlson, 1997); perceived organizational support was measured through Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986); affective commitment was measured through Affective Commitment Subscale (Allen & Meyer, 1990); while, organizational citizenship behavior was measured through Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman, & Fetter, 1990). Sample of the study (N = 169) included male and female employees from cellular and banking organizations. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis showed that perceived organizational support significantly moderated the negative relationship between perceived organizational politics and affective commitment, while, it did not moderate the relationship between perceived organizational politics and organizational citizenship behavior. Overall, the study demonstrated perceived organizational support as an important factor in maintaining the affective commitment of employees in organizations with higher levels of organizational politics.

Organizations' productivity depends mainly on its employees' performance. Organizations put maximum resources, directly or indirectly, to increase their employees' performance and to control or cure the reasons that may decrease their performance. Perceived organizational politics (POP) is one of those hindering factors that may affect employees’ positive organizational behavior. This factor has been historically ignored, but the last decade has generated plenty of literature throwing light on the significance of this variable in organizational life. In this study, aim is to contribute to that literature by studying the moderating role of perceived organizational support (POS) in the relationship of employees' perception of organizational politics and its some behavioral and attitudinal outcomes. Unlike POP, POS contribute positively to employees' attitudes and behaviors. Hence, the significance of this study is to highlight the contributory role of POS in organizational life, in the presence of employees' perception of their organizations to be political. In countries like Pakistan, the dynamic effect of POP and POS is very important to study, as their effect in collectivist cultures may have different expression and meaning. Therefore, in this study, it is attempted to study their relationship with two very important organizational variables that is, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and affective commitment (AC) with the organization. For that purpose, service sector organizations, banks and cellular service providing organizations, were selected as the target organizations of the study, due to the reason that these two service sectors are among the most fast growing sectors in Pakistan's economic landscape. Contributory role of POS and deleterious role of POP is very vital in enhancing and controlling their employees' as well as organizational performance in collectivist societies like Pakistan.

Politics is a term with multifarious connotations which are described by the context of its usage. In public sector context, politics is defined as the means used by the political figures to achieve their desired results and goals which are spurred by a long range of values and vested interests. Viewed from this angle, politics is an important component of the list of functions performed by a firm or organization in its daily routine with positive outcomes for it (Kacmar & Baron, 1999). On the other hand, there is a micro level of perception according to which organizational politics refers to the “actions by individuals which are directed toward the goal of furthering one’s own self-interests without regard for the well-being of others or their organization” (Kacmar & Baron, 1999, p. 4).

Both the perspectives are useful in their own way, the first being the general and the second being the more specific one. The second perspective will be used for the present study where the definition of the organizational politics would be as per the fact that when asked to describe political behavior, individuals typically list self-serving and manipulative activities that observers do not evaluate positively (Ferris & Kacmar, 1992). In other works, politics is treated in a narrower perspective, where it is defined as unsanctioned influencing attempts that seek to promote self-interest at the expense of organizational goals (e.g., Ferris, Frink, Beehr, & Gilmore, 1995; Kacmar & Ferris, 1993).

POS is defined as “employees’ global beliefs about the extent to which the organization values employees’ contributions and cares about their well-being” (Eisenberger et al., 1986, p. 44). Organizations which are supportive in nature, take pride in their employees, and are found to be on fair terms while compensating them and also taking care of their needs. In case of such employers, high levels of POS are thought to engender feelings of trust, long-term obligations, and organizational iden­tification among employees (Eisenberger, Stinglhamber, Vandenberghe, Sucharski, & Rhoades, 2002). Three important elements of POS are the use of discretionary rewards, employer commitment, and trust. When members are reciprocated in terms of rewards which are beyond the dictations of formal policies, they perceive the organizations to be supportive. These discretionary rewards make members feel appreciated, thereby enhancing feelings of POS (Liu, 2009).

The construct of OCB was introduced by Smith, Organ, and Near (1983). OCB is defined as an “individual behavior that is dis­cretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization” (Organ, 1988, p. 4). Later, OCB was redefined by Organ (1990, p. 91) as “contributions to the maintenance and enhancement of the social and psychological context that supports task performance”, and therefore, take out the requirements of OCB as being discretionary and unrewarded. LePine, Colquitt, and Erez (2000) conducted a meta-analysis of OCB dimensions and noted that the literature on OCB and related concepts is fairly diverse with respect to both the nature of the behavioral dimensions studied.

Whereas, it is easily discernible why organizational commitment is an important variable in the organizational sciences, however, the issue about how to best define the organizational commitment has proven to be a more difficult task. Meyer and Allen (1991) developed a widely recognized three-component model of organizational commitment. According to Meyer and Allen's (1997) model, organizational commitment is a multidimensional construct consisting of three variants of commitment. These varying components include AC, continuance commitment, and nor­mative commitment. Of the three varying components of commitment, AC and continuance commitment have been studied most recurrently (Becker & Kernan, 2003; Gade, 2003). AC refers to “an employee's emotional attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the organization" (Meyer & Allen, 1997, p. 67). Among three components of organizational commitment, only AC has been selected for this study as variable of interest because emotional attachment and identification of employee with the organizational goals and values matter more than simply being committed to the organization, because of lacking alternative opportunities to switch the organization.

Relationship of Perceived Organizational Politics with Behavioral Outcomes
Danaeefard, Balutbazeh, and Kashi (2010) found a negative relationship between POP and OCB. At the same time, they found a nonsignificant relationship between POP and self-report measure of OCB. Similarly, numerous studies reported (Rosen, Harris, & Kacmar, 2009; Poon, 2006; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007) negative relationship between employees’ perception of organizational politics and their OCB. Mostly, it has been shown by research that individuals who perceive high level of political activity are found to be less committed to the organization (Hochwarter, Perrewe, Ferris, & Guerico, 1999; Witt, Hilton, & Hochwarter, 2001). Commitment to one’s organization can be badly affected by POP, which has the potential danger of eroding one’s attachment to the organization. It is suggested by the empirical evidence that POP is related to lower levels of organizational commitment (Kacmar & Baron, 1999). One type of organizational commitment is affective that is the degree of emotional bond between the individual and the organization. Here it is supposed that such ties are formed by the individuals because of the organization’s nonpolitical orientation, because in the longer run, there are more chances for this sort of organizations to meet their needs. A number of studies have found negative relationship between POP and employees’ AC to the organization (e.g., Bodla, Danish, & Nawaz, 2012; Chang, Rosen, & Levy, 2009; Vigoda-Gadot & Talmud, 2010).

Relationship of Perceived Organizational Support with Behavioral Outcomes
From the perspective of social exchange theory, it seems logical to assume that when employees perceive their organization to be supportive and concerned with their well-being, they tend to reciprocate that obligation. On one hand, they get emotionally attached to that organization with increased AC, and on the other hand, they also tend to reciprocate this obligation by their increased OCB (Piercy, Cravens, Lane, & Vorhies, 2006) In accordance with the theory of social exchange, a positive relationship has been found between POS and AC (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Rhoades, Eisenberger, & Armeli, 2001; Tumwesigye, 2010; Van Knippenberg & Sleebos, 2006). While studying the mediating role of organization based self-esteem between POS and organizational commitment, Ucar and Ötken (2010) found significant positive relationship between POS and AC. Similarly, a study of 276 employees and their supervisors was conducted by Shore and Wayne (1993) and the results showed positive association between POS and AC. While measuring the mediating role of POS in the relationship between human resource management practices and organizational commitment, Nasurdin, Hemdi, and Guat (2008) found positive relationship between POS and AC; which is further strengthened by Lew (2009).

Similarly, while investigating the mediating role of AC between the relationship of POS and expatriate OCB, Liu (2009) found a positive relationship between POS, AC, and OCB. While, studying the relationship between OCB and social exchange constructs, Ahmadi, Forouzandeh, and Kahreh (2010) found a positive relationship between POS and OCB. Nazim (2009) also reported positive relationship between POS and OCB, while investigating the effects of POS and leader-member exchange on OCB. Asgari, Silong, Ahmad, and Samah (2008) further asserted the positive relationship between POS and OCB, while studying the relationship between leader-member exchange, organizational inflexibility, POS, interactional justice, and OCB.

Relationship between Organizational Politics and Organizational Support
According to Cropanzano, Kacmar, and Bozeman (1995), the two constructs seem to be conceptually different. Being nonpolitical does not necessarily make an organization supportive. Similarly, a work environment in which policies and practices are carried out fairly and in which the same rules apply equally to everyone would likely not be perceived as political. Yet, if that very same organization is not willing to expand itself, it may not be seen as supportive as well. Furthermore, operationalization of politics and support, in the current literature and also as measured here, have a bit different focal point. Political perceptions are referred to in the context of one’s colleagues and superiors and these are about other individuals. However, contrary to this, POS deals with the organization treating it as a whole.

For understanding the relationship between POP and POS, social exchange theory (Blau as cited in Wikhamn & Hall, 2012) provides a very useful explanation, where people rationally assess their self- interests in their social life. This theory implies that people engage in those desired behaviors in social situations that increase the likelihood of achieving their self-interests. According to Kacmar and Baron (1999), organizational politics refers to the actions that are aimed at furthering one’s goals and interests at the expense of others’ or the organization’s goals. Thus, when employees’ perception of organizational politics in their work environment is high that implicates into them the feeling that their organization is not being supportive and caring for its members. In this study, we examined the exchanges between an organization and its employees. According to Cropanzano and Mitchell (2005), each party contributes its part in welfare of the other party in high-quality exchange programs. Contrary to high-quality exchange program, when exchange relationship’s quality is low, such as when POP is high in an organization, the most likely response of the employees is negative attitudes and feelings toward the organization. Resultantly, when the level of POP is high in the organization, social exchange theory directs us to wait for lower levels of POS. Keeping this theoretical framework in mind, Harris, Harris, and Harvey (2007) investigated the relationship between POP and POS and they found a negative relationship between the two variables.

Hypotheses

As mentioned above, POP and POS are two separate constructs and they affect the outcome variables in opposing ways, it is assumed in the present study that POS shall moderate the relationship between POP and employees’ AC to their organization and their OCB as well. Keeping in view this perspective, the following hypotheses were proposed for this study:

1.	Perceived organizational politics is negatively related with organizational citizenship behavior and affective commitment
2.	Perceived organizational support is positively related with organizational citizenship behavior and affective commitment
3.	Perceived organizational politics is negatively related with perceived organizational support
4.	Perceived organizational support moderate the relationship between perceived organizational politics and affective commitment such that it will dampen their relationship
5.	Perceived organizational support moderate the relationship between perceived organizational politics and organizational citizenship behavior such that it will dampen their relationship

METHOD

Sample
A sample of 161 employees including both men (n = 122) and women (n = 39) from various cellular service organization and banks was drawn. Data were collected from Multan and Lahore that included employees from nonmanagerial staff. The respondents included 100 participants including men (n = 77) and women (n = 23) from cellular services and 61 participants including men (n = 45) and women (n = 16) from banking sector. The base line of academic qualification of the sample was graduate level of education and base line for the job experience was 1 year.

Instruments
Survey of Perceived Organizational Support Scale. Shortened version of this scale (Eisenberger et al., 1986) comprising of 8 items was used. The scale was scored on a 7-point Likert rating scale where strongly disagree was scored as 1 and strongly agree as 7. A sample item is "People in this organization attempt to build themselves up by tearing others down". The score on the scale ranged from 8 to 56. Items no. 2, 3, 5, and 7 were reversed scored. Alpha coefficient found for this scale was .78 in this study.

Perceived Organizational Politics Scale. POP was measured using this 15 item Scale (Kacmar & Carlson, 1997). The scale was scored on a 5-point Likert rating scale where strongly disagree was scored as 1 and strongly agree as 5. The score on the scale ranged from 15 to 75. Items no. 3, 4, 10, and 11 were reversed scored. Alpha coefficient was found to be .73 in the present study.

Affective Commitment Scale. AC was measured with 6 items Affective Commitment Subscale of Organizational Comittment Scale (Allen & Meyer, 1990). Scores were reported on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree. The score ranged from 6 to 42. Items no. 3, 4, and 5 were reversed scored. Sample items are "This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me"; and "I feel emotionally attached to this organization." Alpha coefficient was found to be .70 in this study.

Organizational Citizenship Behavior Scale. OCB was measured through this scale (Podsakoff et al., 1990). The scale comprised of 24 items which tapped 5 facets of OCB that is Altruism, Courtesy, Sportsmanship, Conscientiousness, and Civic Virtue. The responses were reported on a 5-point Likert scale format ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The score ranged from 24 to 120. Items no. 2, 3, 4, 7, 16, and 19 were reversed scored. Alpha reliability for the overall scale was found to be .74 in this study.

Procedure
The official permission was acquired from the management of the banks for sample recruitment. The participants were individually contacted in their respective offices. They were briefed about the rationale and objectives of the current study and provided with the booklet containing the aforementioned scales. The instruments were accompanied by written as well as oral instruction on how to respond each question/item. They were assured of the confidentiality of the information that they were going to provide, as it would only be used for research purpose.

RESULTS

The present study was conducted to assess the relationship among the variables of POP, AC to the organization, OCB, and POS. To assess these relationships, Pearson Product Moment Correlation was computed. Moreover, one of the major objectives of the current study was to investigate how the impact of POP on AC and OCB might have been influenced by POS. This objective was achieved through the computation of multiple moderated regression analyses. The results are mentioned in tabular format.

Table 1:	Correlation Matrix for All Study Variables (N = 161)
**p < .01. ***p < .001

Table 1 shows that POP is found to be negatively related with POS and AC. Relationship between POP and OCB is found to be positive. Relationship between POS is found to be positive with AC and it’s relationship with POP and OCB is found to be negative. In the light of these findings, the data partially supported hypothesis 1, as POP is found to be negatively related to AC only. Data also partially support hypothesis 2, as POS is found to be positively related to AC only. POP is found to be negatively related to POS; hence, supporting hypothesis 3.

Table 2 shows that POS has moderated the relationship of POP and AC, explaining 2% variance in it, ∆R² = .02, ∆F (1, 154) = 4.34, p = .03. The results in Table 2 shows that the 30% of the variance in AC is due to POP, POS, and their interaction, R² = .30, F (4, 154) = 10.84, p < .000. Furthermore, gender, occupation, and job experience (as control variables) do not explain any variance in AC. Hence, the fourth hypothesis is supported.

Table 2:	Moderated Multiple Regression Analysis of POS and POP in Predicting AC and OCB (N= 161)
Note. Control variables = gender, occupation, and job experience *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001

Results in Table 2 also show that POS did not moderate the relationship between POP and OCB. Gender, occupation, and job experience, as control variables, could not explain any variance in OCB. Thus, our fifth hypothesis is not supported by the results.

Fig. 1: Moderating role of perceived organizational support between perceived organizational politics and affective commitment to organization

Figure 1 explains that POS has moderated the relationship between POP and AC such that it has increased their affective commitment to their organization regardless of high levels of organizational politics. Though the commitment is higher with high organizational support under low level of organizational politics, yet it is also high under high level of organizational politics as compare to low levels of organizational support.

DISCUSSION

Present study was intended to explore the impact of mutual interaction of POP and POS on AC and OCB. It was assumed that employees’ perception of high organizational support would weaken the relationship between their perception of organizational politics and the outcome variables in organizational setting. The study also explored the relationship of POP and POS with AC and OCB.

Findings showed positive relationship of POP with OCB and a negative relationship with AC, thus partially supporting first hypothesis (see Table 1). Similarly, second hypothesis proposed a positive relationship of POS with OCB and AC. The results of the correlational analysis showed POS to be negatively related with OCB and positively related to AC, thus partially accepting hypothesis 2 (see Table 1). The correlational analysis showed that both POP and POS were negatively correlated with each other, thus supporting third hypothesis (see Table 1).

Moderated multiple regression analysis showed POS, as a moderator, weakened the relationships of POP with AC (see Table 2). The results of the moderated multiple regressions showed that POS influenced only the relationship between POP and AC, as it was proposed, thus supporting hypothesis 4 (see Table 2). On the other hand, the moderating effect of POS, in the relationship between POP and OCB, was not found to be significant, thus refuting hypothesis 5 (see Table 2).

Researches on the relationship among POP, POS, and OCB are still inconclusive because there are other researches which found nonsignificant relationship between POP and OCB (Byrne, 2005; Cropanzano, Howes, Grandey, & Toth, 1997; Danaeefard et al., 2010). Similar findings for POS and OCB exist in literature regarding their nonsignificant relationship (Cropanzano et al., 1997).

Reasons for positive relationship between POP and OCB can be attributed to many factors. Ferris, Russ, and Fandt (1989) suggested that at least three potential responses to the POP would be to withdraw from the organization; remain a member of the organization, but do not involve in the politics; and to remain a member of the organization and become involved in the politics. These responses appear similar in nature to Hirschman's (1970) exit, loyalty, and voice, respectively. So, one key factor causing the positive relationship between the two variables may be that the persons who remain part of the organization and do not get involved in political activities may get inclined to adopt citizenship behavior as a compensatory phenomenon. As people with such orientation perceive political activity to be an unhealthy or unrelated, they tend to facilitate others and the work environment in order to compensate such unhealthy practices like politics.

On the other hand, those who remain the part of the organization and get involved in political activities may tend to adopt OCB as a political tactic to enhance their self-interest. As the phenomenon of organizational politics deals with individual as well as group interactions, it has sociological aspect in its orientation. As OCB has prosocial orientation in it, the individuals involved in it may use this phenomenon as a mean to achieve their self-interest by developing favorable impression among their cliques and superiors. Another factor influencing the relationship between POP and OCB may be the contextual factor. According to Hofstede (2001), in collectivist societies, the self-image of an individual is inclined toward social approval and acceptance, instead of personal gains and benefits.

As Pakistani society falls into the category of a collectivist society, according to Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov's (2010) individualism index, people in this society tend to emphasize on building and maintaining relationships. Harmony in relationships is the primary focus in this society and relationships are considered more important than tasks. Such orientation may also contribute its part in influencing people's OCB, despite their higher perception of organizational politics that is individual centric.

The key factor influencing the relationship between POS and OCB can also be the contextual factor. Perceived fairness and organizational rewards (pay, recognition, and promotion) are important antecedent factor in determining employee's perception of organizational support (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). As previously stated, according to Hofstede et al. (2010), Pakistani society falls into the category of a collectivist society, in such societies, individual gains, and desires are less important than collective gains. Eisenbeger et al.’s (1986) description of perceived organizational support is more inclined towards individualism. Individualistic approach is in contradiction to the value structure in collectivist society like Pakistan; that might have been the reason for negative relationship with OCB. The similar reason might be at work, which did not support the fifth hypothesis of the present study.

The results of the present study also reinforce the previous research findings regarding the relationships among POP, POS, and AC. Results show that this relationship between POP and AC was weakened when POS was introduced as moderator. So, this finding further validated the phenomenon that POS would moderate the relationship between POP and AC and concludes that employees, perceiving their organization to be caring and supportive for their well-being, will tend to be effectively committed to their organization despite their high perception of political activity in their organizational setting. Hence, these findings support fourth hypothesis of the study.

LIMITATIONS

Firstly, there may be certain issues that contribute to the weaknesses of the study. For example, the data were collected exclusively through self-report method, without the inclusion of multiple sources. Consequently, the relationships between our variables of study may have been inflated due to response bias. So, the perceptual nature of the data collection mandates that the results reported in this study should be viewed with caution. Secondly, the variables of POP and OCB have further subcomponents. It is quite possible that some of the facets or subcomponents may have correlated significantly with the other variables, but the overall relationship of that variable with other variables would have minimized their impact or diminished it. Thirdly, the most common and prevalent issue, like most other researches, is the issue of the sample size. It is somewhat difficult to generalize the findings as sample included only 161 employees from only two sectors of the private industrial cluster, that is, cellular organizations and banking organizations. This method of purposive and convenient sampling may face the issues of external validity, while, interpreting the data in general terms. Fourthly, while studying POP, POS, and AC, it is also important to see pay level as a demographic variable. Unfortunately, people did not elicit information about this variable, considering this information as too personal. Lack of such information may also affect the interpretation of the relationship between these variables. Lastly, age is another demographic variable that keeps its place in studying OCB and its relationship with other variables. This variable was not included into the study because majority of the sample ranged between 30-40 years of age. This range did not provide with distinct age categories to measure variability. So that homogeneity in the sample regarding age lead to the exclusion of this variable in the demographics.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Keeping in view the current issues contaminating the present research, it is recommended that, to overcome the issue of method variance, future researcher use multiple sources for data collection along with self-report measures. It is also recommended that the future researches should attempt to measure the relationship of the subcomponents of the variables of POP and OCB with other variables and their subcomponents.

To deal with the issues of external validity, the sample size should be increased and the sample should also include a number of other private sector organizations as well like pharmaceuticals, medical practitioners, engineers, and so forth. The demographic information related to income level and age level is also worth significant for studying the relationship between these variables.

IMPLICATIONS

In the present study, POS moderated the relationship between POP and AC to the organization. This finding supported the previous literature regarding POP and its relationship with POS and AC. This finding further extends the scope of research, previously conducted in the developed countries, to the developing countries like Pakistan relating POP with POS and AC. The present study also did not support the previous literature regarding the relationship among POP, POS, and OCB. These findings lead to the need for the further investigation of the impact of collectivist culture on the relationship among POP, POS, and OCB.

The present study is one of its kinds in the present work environment where human values and resources are ignored. This study would definitely help in paving the ways to improve the present work environment in underdeveloped countries like Pakistan. This study would also reinforce the research community in the collectivist cultures like Pakistan to further extend its endeavors in this area of research and find out its further practical and research implications.

CONCLUSION

The present study found POP to be negatively related to AC and POS, while it was found to be positively related to OCB, thus throwing light on the aspect of culture in influencing OCB. Similarly, this study showed POS to be positively related to AC, while, it was found to be negatively related to OCB, again showing light to the future researchers to explore the cultural dimension of influence in the relationship between POS and OCB. Finally, POS was found to moderate the relationship of POP and AC, while, it could not moderate the relationship of POP and OCB.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmadi, P., Forouzandeh, S., & Kahreh, M. S. (2010). The relationship between OCB and social exchange constructs. European Journal of Economics, Finance, and Administrative Sciences, 19, 107-120.
2. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
3. Asgari, A., Silong, A. D., Ahmad, A., & Samah, B. A. (2008). The relationship between leader-member exchange, organizational inflexibility, perceived organizational support, interactional justice, and organizational citizenship behavior. African Journal of Business Management, 2(8), 138-145.
4. Becker, T. E., & Kernan, M. C. (2003). Matching commitment to supervisors and organizations to in-role and extra-role performance. Human Performance, 16, 327-348.
5. Bodla, M. A., Danish, R. Q., & Nawaz, M. M. (2012). Mediating role of perceived organizational politics in relating job characteristics to morale. African Journal of Business Management, 6(15), 5185-5192.
6. Byrne, Z. S. (2005). Fairness reduces the negative effects of organizational politics on turnover intentions, citizenship behavior, and job performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(2), 175-200.
7. Chang, C. H., Rosen, C. C., & Levy, P. E. (2009). The relationship between perception of organizational politics and employee attitudes, strain, and behavior: A meta-analytic examination. Academy Management Journal, 52(4), 779-801.
8. Cropanzano, R., Howes, J. C., Grandey, A. A., & Toth, P. (1997). The relation­ship of organizational politics and support to work behaviors, attitudes, and stress. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 159-180.
9. Cropanzano, R., Kacmar, K. M., & Bozeman, D. P. (1995). The social setting of work organizations: Politics, justice, and support. In R. Cropanzano & K. M Kacmar (Eds.), Organizational politics, justice, and support: Managing the social climate of the workplace (pp. 1-18). Westport, CT: Quorum.
10. Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874-900.
11. Danaeefard, H., Balutbazeh, A. E., & Kashi, K. H. (2010). Good soldiers' perceptions of organizational politics understanding the relation between organizational citizenship behaviors and perceptions of organizational politics: Evidence from Iran. European Journal of Economics, Finance, and Administrative Sciences, 18, 146-162.
12. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500-507.
13. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Per­ceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 565-573.
14. Ferris, G. R., Frink, D. D., Beehr, T. A., & Gilmore, D. C. (1995). Political fairness and fair politics: The conceptual integration of divergent constructs. In R. Cropanzano & K. Kacmar (Eds.), Organiza­tional politics, justice, and support: Managing the social climate of the workplace (pp. 21-36). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
15. Ferris, G. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (1992). Perceptions of organizational polities. Journal of Management, 18, 93-116.
16. Gade, P. A. (2003). Organizational commitment in the military: An overview. Military Psychology, 15, 163-166.
17. Harris, R. B., Harris, K. J., & Harvey, P. (2007). A test of competing models of the relationships among perceptions of organizational politics, perceived organizational support, and individual outcomes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 631-655.
18. Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19. Hochwarter, W. A., Perrewe, P. L., Ferris, G. R., & Guerico, R. (1999). Commit­ment as an antidote to the tension and turnover consequences of organiza­tional politics. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55, 277-297.
20. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (3^rd ed). New York, USA: McGraw Hill.
22. Kacmar, K. M., & Baron, R. A. (1999). Organizational politics: The state of the field links to related processes, and an agenda for future research. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (pp. 1-39). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
23. Kacmar, K. M., & Carlson, D. S. (1997). Further validation of the Perceptions of Politics Scale (POPS): A multiple sample investigation. Journal of Manage­ment, 23, 627-658.
24. Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Politics at work: Sharpening the focus of political behavior in organizations. Business Horizons, 36, 70-74.
25. LePine, J., Colquitt, J., & Erez, A. (2000). Adaptability to changing task contexts: Effects of general cognitive ability, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. Personnel Psychology, 53, 563-594.
26. Lew, T. Y. (2009). The relationships between perceived organizational support, felt obligation, affective organizational commitment, and turnover intention of academics working with private higher educational institutions in Malaysia. European Journal of Social Sciences, 9, 72-87.
27. Liu, Y. (2009). Perceived organizational support and expatriate organizational citizenship behavior: The mediating role of affective commitment towards the parent company. Personnel Review, 38, 307-319.
28. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61-98.
29. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Nasurdin, A. M., Hemdi, M. A., & Guat, L. P. (2008). Does perceived organizational support mediate the relationship between human resource management practices and organizational commitment? Asian Academy of Management Journal, 13(1), 15-36.
31. Nazim, A. (2009). Effects of perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange on organizational citizenship behavior. Abasyn University Journal of Social Sciences, 3(2), 53-56.
32. Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behav­ior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
33. Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organiza­tional citizenship behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational be­havior (pp. 43-72). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
34. Piercy, N. F., Cravens, D. W., Lane, N., & Vorhies, D. W. (2006). Driving organizational citizenship behaviors and salesperson in-role behavior performance: The role of management control and perceived organizational support. Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 244-262.
35. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142.
36. Poon, J. M. L. (2006). Trust-in-supervisor and helping coworkers: Moderating effect of perceived politics. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(6), 518-532.
37. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698-714.
38. Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). Affective commitment of the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825-36.
39. Rosen, C. C., Harris, K. J., & Kacmar, K. M. (2009). The emotional implications of organizational politics: A process model. Human Relations, 62, 27-57.
40. Shore, L. M., & Wayne, S. J. (1993). Commitment and employee behavior: Comparison of affective commitment and continuance commitment with perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 774-780.
41. Smith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship be­havior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663.
42. Tumwesigye, G. (2010). The relationship between perceived organizational support and turnover intentions in a developing country: The mediating role of organizational commitment. African Journal of Business Management, 4(6), 942-952.
43. Ucar, D., & Ötken, A. B. (2010). Perceived organizational support and organizational commitment: The mediating role of organization based self-esteem. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadive İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(2), 86-90.
44. Van Knippenberg, D., & Sleebos, E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: Self-definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 585-605.
45. Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Leadership style, organizational politics, and employees’ performance: An empirical examination of two competing models. Personnel Review, 36, 661-683.
46. Vigoda-Gadot, E., & Talmud, I. (2010). Organizational politics and job outcomes: The moderating effect of trust and social support. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(11), 2829-2861.
47. Wikhamn, W., & Hall, A. T. (2012). Social exchange in a Swedish work environment. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3, 56-64
48. Witt, L., Hilton, T., & Hochwarter, W. (2001). Addressing politics in matrix teams. Group and Organization Management, 26, 230-247.